All of it. It doesn't require specific motherboards
Of course it does. TPM keys are stored in HARDWARE onboard a specific motherboard. This creates unnecessary and unwanted dependency on specific hardware.
TPMs are also built in to all CPUs from the last decade, and the firmware for TPMs are rarely touched.
On my PC the TPM is wiped whenever a BIOS update is installed. This behavior is extremely common.
My favourite part about your comment is it shows that people will eventually come around to calling the current mistake "classic" and demand it. Your post would not have been out of place back in 2015 lamenting about the loss of Windows 7 and lambasting Windows 10.
Why would anyone give two shits about unnecessarily disruptive change when there is little to no commensurate value to show for it in return? This isn't the 90s. PCs and operating systems are a mature technology. For many there is more value in continuity.
These days the value proposition is often negative given Microsoft's malware oriented business model depends upon increasing aggression towards its own customers. Endless ads, spying, embarrassing UX regressions and unwanted dependencies rather than useful value.
That's a great way of advertising to the world you don't have a clue what you're talking about.
What was said that was wrong or clueless? Did you have anything something substantive to say?
Not Microsoft's problem that manufacturers use shitty parts. TPMs have been included on all standard motherboards for over a decade.
I have TPM disabled in BIOS to ensure it can never be used by Windows. I don't want dependencies on specific motherboards or to have random firmware updates blow the TPM and with it whatever keys are stored there.
"Second, the US needs more export controls on chips to hamstring Chinese access to advanced compute so that they simply canâ(TM)t train on US model outputs. That could make conducting distillation attacks pointless, Anthropic suggested."
Distillation requires relatively little compute. This is like trying to prevent the builder of a cruise ship from obtaining the means of obtaining deck chairs to prevent them from competing with other shipyards. This isn't how reality works.
"We believe combating the threat of illicit distillation requires coordinated action between government and industry, and we will continue working with Congress and the Administration to maintain American AI leadership"
"illicit distillation" is not a thing. In a way the crying is quite telling. If the statement is true and in fact "AI leadership" is based on distillation then Anthropic and everyone else is fucked.
OTOH, specialized quantum computers are already useful. DWave sells one design.
And it's been very useful in making money for DWave, so you are in fact correct. It's also been useful for academics being able to publish blog posts and papers arguing over whether it is or isn't actually a "quantum computer", whatever that really is.
The major issue of strlcpy() is, it needs to check the source string length, then decide whether to do the string copy or not. So in effect the computer needs to parse the source string twice unnecessarily, and introduces a timing gap, making the function not thread safe.
strscpy() is thread safe because it always tries to copy the source string regardless it will truncate or not. Thus a change of content of source string in the middle of strscpy() operation is not going to cause any undefined behaviour. The implementation can be thread safe.
What is being described is GIGO not thread safety.
"The Avis WIZARD decides if you get to drive a car. Your head won't touch the pillow of a Sheraton unless their computer says it's okay." -- Arthur Miller
